www.manaraa.com

Strategic implications ofHR role management ina dynamic environment

Cathy Sheehan, Helen De Cieri, Brian Cooper and Tracey SheaDepartment of Management, Monash University, Caulfield East, Australia

AbstractPurpose – The purpose of this paper is to consider the impact of human resource (HR) role overloadand HR role conflict on the HR function’s involvement in strategic decision making and to examinewhether conditions of environmental dynamism moderate the impact of HR role conflict and HR roleoverload in that relationship.Design/methodology/approach – The authors collected data from two sources, senior HR andtop management team (TMT) executives. A total of 180 HR executives and 109 TMT memberscompleted the survey. In all, 102 organisations were included in the sample with matched HR executiveand TMT responses.Findings – Results did not support hypothesised negative relationships between HR role managementand involvement in strategic decision making but did establish the moderating effect of environmentaldynamism, such that these associations were more negative at higher levels of dynamism.Research limitations/implications – The cross-sectional nature of the study precludes makinginferences about causality and would need to be replicated with a longitudinal design before strongerinferences could be drawn with regard to the relationships between the variables. A strength of thestudy however is the use of two sources of data to address the issue of common method variance.Practical implications – The research has implications for the potential value that HR provides indynamic environments and the risk that HR role conflict and overload pose to the contribution that HRcan make during these periods.Originality/value – The research shifts the focus away from the definition of HR roles to consideringhow these roles are enacted and kept in balance.Keywords Quantitative, Environmental dynamism, HR role, HR role conflict, HR role overloadPaper type Research paper

IntroductionThe factors that determine the strategic input of the human resource (HR) professionalcontinue to be a point of discussion in the academic literature (Aldrich et al., 2015).Indeed Lawler (2011, p. 171), reflecting on the strategic progress of the HR professionalfor the 50th Anniversary edition of Human Resource Management, stated that“my research and experience tells me that for the last 20 years or so, HR has notprogressed significantly in terms of its strategic role in corporations”. To furtherunderstand the factors that may detract from a strategic HR role, the argumentdeveloped in this paper is that the variety, and sometimes competing expectations ofthe roles played by the HR professional within their social system (Lemmergaard, 2009;Welch and Welch, 2012), potentially generate problems for HR professionals thatundermine strategic decision-making inclusion. Theoretically the argument is madethat where the HR professional experiences role overload or conflict, the HR function’s

Personnel ReviewVol. 45 No. 2, 2016

pp. 353-373©Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0048-3486DOI 10.1108/PR-04-2014-0071

Received 3 April 2014Revised 1 December 2014

14 May 2015Accepted 29 July 2015

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm

The authors acknowledge the support provided by the Australian Senior Human ResourceRoundtable (ASHRR), the Australian Research Council (ARC) and Monash University, as thisresearch is funded as ARC-Linkage Project ID, LP100100294.

353

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

power of meaning, as proposed by Hardy (1996) and more recently considered bySheehan et al. (2014), will be diminished and HR professionals will be less likely to beinvolved in strategic decision making. The first aim of the current research therefore isto analyse the impact of HR role management on HR professional inclusion in strategicdecision-making processes.

A further aim of the research is to consider the impact of environmental dynamismon HR involvement in decision making. It has been argued that dynamic conditions arebecoming the norm as unpredictable environments reduce the likelihood of longterm sustainable competitive advantage ( Jiao et al., 2013). Economic volatility createschallenges, but also opportunities for HR managers and employers wishing to differentiatethemselves as an “employer of choice” by investing in human resource management(HRM) strategies such as extensive training and development, or employee incentive andbonus schemes (Zatzick and Iverson, 2006). There is evidence that in crisis situations, theHR function has assumed an important role in decisions related to the strategic challengesthat face MNEs to reduce costs and enhance productivity (Gunnigle et al., 2013). Althoughthe HR function has the potential to make a substantial contribution during periods ofenvironmental dynamism, we make the argument that if at the time HR professionals areexperiencing HR role overload and HR role conflict, the HR function’s power of meaning islow (Hardy, 1996; Sheehan et al., 2014), and the opportunity to contribute to decisionmaking will be reduced. The second aim of this research therefore is to examine howconditions of environmental dynamism moderate the impact of HR role conflict and HRrole overload on HR’s inclusion in these strategic decision-making processes.

The research contributes to the ongoing discussion about progressing HR’sstrategic role as highlighted by Aldrich et al. (2015) and Lawler (2011). The researchreviews this issue in the context of environmental dynamism and therefore has addedvalue in view of the argument that dynamic conditions are becoming the norm( Jiao et al., 2013). In order to realise the potentially positive contribution that HR canmake during periods of dynamism, as argued by Dubois and Dubois (2012), Nijssenand Paauwe (2012) and Zagelmeyer and Gollan (2012), it is necessary to firstunderstand how HR professionals can be assured of a place in key strategicconversations during these periods. Structurally the discussion first introduces theimportance of the power of meaning for the HR function and an analysis of how roleoverload and role conflict detract from that power. The hypotheses of a direct effectof HR role management on HR strategic decision-making involvement are thendeveloped. The discussion then considers the interaction effect of HR rolemanagement and environmental dynamism on the involvement of HR professionalsin the strategic decision-making process.

HR power of meaning and HR role managementGuest and Bos-Nehles (2013) argue for the importance of a unified commitment fromthe top management group to HR initiatives. The authors explain that when decisionsare taken about the introduction and implementation of new HR practices, the supportof the chief executive and other senior executives is critical. Such support howeveris not assured and Pritchard (2010), in her discussion of the transition to a strategic HRpartner role, argues that for the HR professional to be able to operate effectivelywithin strategic processes and make an impact, the HR professional must be influential.This requires the HR professional to socially construct an identity and a “performance”that are important in developing a shared understanding of the meaning of what theHR strategic partnership involves.

354

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

Sheehan et al. (2014), in their analysis of the sources of power of the HR function,reinforce the importance of developing a shared understanding of the meaning of HRMwith the top management group. Drawing from Hardy’s (1996) dimensions of power,Sheehan et al. (2014) explain that the power of meaning refers to the capacity to legitimiseinterests through the management of meaning, using symbols, rituals and language tomake initiatives appear legitimate, desirable, rational and inevitable. Importantlythey add that the proposed value of HRM involvement within formal and informaldecision-making processes, or process power, is often contingent on the power ofmeaning that is assigned to HR professionals by other managers or generated by the HRprofessional themselves. Sheehan et al. (2014) note the importance of how well HRprofessionals communicate effective role management. Referring to Ulrich’s (1997, 2009)work on the multiple HR roles, the authors explain that when the HR professionalstruggles to balance the demands of the various roles they lose credibility and influence.It is the importance of this HR role management that is the focus of the current research.The following section provides an overview of the roles of the HR professional and theassociated role management problems of role overload and role conflict.

HR professional roles have gone through significant change resulting in multiplerole dimensions (Truss et al., 2002). Ulrich (1997), a key architect in the re-design of HRroles transformed HR professionals into a new category of manager, the “HR businesspartner”, that requires HR professionals to become “strategic partners”, “administrativeexperts”, “employee champions” and “change agents”. These four roles shifted thefocus away from the traditional personnel support role to one focused on HR as adelivery function that primarily served the business (Caldwell, 2008). In Ulrich’s muchcited research into the role of the HR professional (see Ulrich, 1997, 2009; Ulrich et al.,2009; Ulrich and Brockbank, 2005) he has re-visited his categorisation and madevariations to the terms used. In his 2009 writing the employee champion role has beenre-defined to incorporate employee advocacy along with human capital developer.The administrative expert role is now termed the functional expert and continues torefer to administrative efficiency but makes a stronger link between the delivery of HRpractices for the development of individual ability and organisational capability.The strategic partner role now incorporates the change agent responsibility. The lastrole, HR leader, is seen as one that integrates the other four roles and describes an HRleader as one who is credible both within their own function and to those outside.The revision incorporates some refinement of the HR roles but the key areas continue toemphasise employee advocacy and human capital development, functional expertiseand strategic partnership. On the one hand, this refinement may be evidence of anincreased understanding of the HR role but other writers such as Lemmergaard (2009)see the changes as evidence of the underlying difficulty in capturing the variety in theHR position. Lemmergaard (2009) notes that “[…] Ulrich and Brockbank’s changingthinking might suggest that maybe there is no single definitive model” (p. 188).

Lemmergaard (2009) has argued that Ulrich’s model is both simplistic andproblematic, particularly with regard to the gap between the conceptualisation ofthe roles and the pragmatic difficulties for an HR manager attempting to enact all of theroles. Caldwell (2008) has similarly noted that as HR business partnering has grown inpopularity, questions have emerged about how each HR role is actually defined andwhat specific competencies they require. Caldwell (2003), in his examination of thevarious HR roles taken on by personnel and HR managers in the UK, for example,determined that 39 per cent of respondents were unable to identify a main role. Caldwellobserved that the failure to identify a main role reflects the multifaceted and complex

355

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

nature of HR work and also posited that HR professionals may as a result be experiencingsome degree of role conflict. Commenting on the combination of Ulrich’s roles, Caldwell(2003) argues that the prescriptive vision for the HR function is an “overreach” that fails tocapture the complexity of meeting the demands of each of the roles.

Elsewhere there is concern that the strategic presence of HR professionals isunderdeveloped and they remain caught up with operational tasks (Lawler, 2011;Ulrich, 2011). The emergence of a business partner role for HR, for example hasrequired building credibility and working more closely with line managers to enact HRat the business level. The result has been that HR professionals are often consumedwith the hurdle of doing the HR work itself as HR professionals have taken on more ofan administrative burden (Lawler, 2011; Ulrich, 2011). Consequently Cohen (2011)reflects that along with identifying HR issues, HR professionals face the challenge ofhow to practice HR effectively. Similarly Welch and Welch (2012) have extended thediscussion beyond definitions of what the HR roles are to a consideration of how thevarious HR roles are enacted or carried out. Drawing from role theory Welch andWelch (2012, p. 599) explain that “roles are conceptualised as behavioural expectationsothers have regarding an individual in a certain context”. These expectations maybe generated by official job descriptions but formal role expectations may also beimpacted by the norms, beliefs and priorities generated within the social system(Floyd and Lane, 2000; Welch and Welch, 2012). For the HR professional therefore eventhough they have roles assigned through a formal job description, the variety, andsometimes competing expectations of actors in their social system potentially generateproblems for HR role management. Beer (1997) has also questioned the capacity ofan HR professional to be able to successfully address complex HR role requirementsand discusses whether it is best to actually just focus on the strategic role and shedtraditional administrative, compliance and service roles. The comment is made that HRexecutives who have integrated the roles find that there is simply not enough time tocomplete all responsibilities; effectively the HR professional becomes overloaded.Over a decade later, Lemmergaard (2009) echoes the concern that HR executives maynot be able fulfil roles simultaneously.

Role overload has been defined by Kahn et al. (1964) as a perception thatrole demands are overwhelming relative to available resources. When role demandscreate the perception that available resources, or time as argued by Beer (1997), areinadequate to deal with them, the result is distraction and stress. Brown et al. (2005),for example showed that role overload counteracted the positive effects of self-efficacy, orconfidence in one’s ability, and the resultant pursuit of goals. In other words, individualswho normally have belief in their own ability and are able to visualise conceivable futureachievements in goal setting are likely to constrain their vision of what is attainable whenthey experience role overload. This effect of constrained goal attainment is evidentin Beer’s description of the impact of HR role overload. Beer (1997) explains that thelimitations of time mean that the HR professional is unable to meet all HR rolerequirements so they change their view of the goals that can be achieved. The urgent andimmediate nature of the administrative, compliance and service-oriented activitieseffectively drive out the capacity to attend to more ambiguous and long termstrategic priorities, a point that has been reinforced by Aldrich et al. (2015) for current dayHR professionals.

Alternatively those HR professionals who have been able to transition to a strategicrole find that their inclination to attend to the traditional administrative tasks diminishesand these tasks are left unattended. Either way an important HR role is neglected as a

356

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

result of the HR professional’s need to stretch their attention, effort and resources to coveroverwhelming demands. For the purposes of the current research we build on Kahn et al.’s(1964) definition of role overload to define HR role overload as the perception that HR roledemands involved in attending to the traditional administrative, or functional expert role,as well as emergent strategic roles are overwhelming relative to available resources.

As well as this discussion of role overload and the time management demandsinvolved in attending to competing traditional administrative and emergent strategicroles, the issue of HR role conflict has attracted discussion in the managementof competing employer and employee expectations. Legge (1989), Kamoche (1994) andPaauwe (2009) have argued that shifting to a strategic HR role and a focus on theHR economic contribution has been accompanied by a negative impact on the traditionalHR responsibility for the stewardship of the social contract at work. Kochan (2004, 2007)and Van Buren et al. (2011) have argued that the HR professional’s strategic focus has ledto a crisis of trust and a loss of legitimacy with both employees and society. Kochan (2004)cites the examples of longer working hours, stagnant wages and increasing job insecurityto conclude that diverging HRM priorities and increasing pressures of the workforce havecreated a widening gulf between the needs of organisations and their employees andultimately a breakdown in employee trust in the HR function. Kochan’s researchhighlights ongoing practical difficulties for the HR professional who is reconciling the HRroles of employee advocacy and strategic partner and suggests that there are qualitativeimpacts for employees in how they are dealt with by HR professionals.

The reported tensions for the HR professional who is trying to balance employeeand management expectations are consistent with the experience of role conflict.Drawing from classical organisational theory and role theory, Rizzo et al. (1970) argue,using the principle of single accountability, that ideally a person should be accountablefor the successful execution of tasks to one and only one source or superior. As laterincorporated by Welch and Welch (2012), Rizzo et al. (1970) then use role theoryto explain that when the behaviours expected of an individual are inconsistent theywill experience stress, become dissatisfied and perform less effectively than ifthe expectations imposed on them did not conflict. They define role conflict in terms ofthe dimensions of congruency-incongruency or compatibility-incompatibility in therequirements of the role, where congruency or compatibility is judged relative to a setof standards or conditions that impinge upon role performance (Rizzo et al., 1970).

Applying this discussion to HR role management, the alignment of employee advocacyand strategic roles potentially involves a conflict, or incompatibility and a lack ofcongruency, of expectations (Welch and Welch, 2012). This is distinct from role overloadas discussed above which refers to the satisfaction of administrative and strategic roledemands relative to available resources. For the purposes of the current research thereforewe define HR role conflict as congruency-incongruency or compatibility-incompatibility inthe requirements of the HR role, where congruency or compatibility is judged relative to aset of expectations.

Having established that HR role overload and conflict are potentially implicit in HR rolerequirements the following section considers the implications of these HR role demandsfor HR professionals seeking involvement in strategic decision-making processes.

The impact of HR role overload and conflictKochan (2007) and Van Buren et al. (2011) highlight the potentially negative outcomesfor employees of conflicting HR roles but there are also ramifications for the strategicfocus that HR professionals can successfully pursue. Along with the concerns raised by

357

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

these authors that the HR role change has shifted HR from its proper responsibilitiestowards employees, there is concurrent debate about whether strategic HRresponsibilities to the organisation are being understood and enacted effectively.Lawler (2011), for example has reflected that despite ongoing changes the HR functionhas not progressed significantly in terms of its strategic role in corporations. Wright et al.(2001) in a comparative review of the perspectives of both top level line and HRexecutives established that top level line executives lacked confidence in HR’s successfuldelivery of a strategic role and ability to provide a value adding contribution.

A key indicator of organisational confidence in a strategic role for HR isrepresentation in senior decision-making arenas. Caldwell (2011) argues, for example thatHR representation on the Board of Directors indicates the profession’s “symbolic capital”,or professional esteem, recognition, status and respect. There is evidence that HRprofessionals have attained increasing recognition with membership on Boards ofDirectors (see Kramar, 2012) but, as Buyens and De Vos (2001) and Kelly and Gennard(2001, 2007) suggest, strategic formulation does not always occur through formalmechanisms, it is access to both formal and informal decision making that providesa linkage for HR professionals to the strategic planning process. Caldwell (2011)acknowledges Kelly and Gennard’s (2007) arguments and agrees that althoughBoardroom representation does provide gravitas, failure to have a presence on the Boardof Directors may not detract from the influence that HR representatives can have instrategic discussions as there is substantial value via involvement in decision-makingprocesses further down the organisation within other executive groupings. Kelly andGennard (2007) argue strongly for the importance of both formal and informaldiscussions that take place within the executive group. The importance of informalchannels of influence has been supported elsewhere by writers who suggest that mostnew strategic ideas do not emerge in formal meetings. Buyens and De Vos (2001) explainthat although formal strategic decision-making arenas are important, informal ad hocstrategic discussions referred to as “strategic adaptation”, are the most likely forum forstrategy formulation. In informal discussions people are able to take the time to thinkthrough options, debate possibilities and formulate ideas. Buyens and De Vos (2001) alsostress the importance of HR’s involvement across the full range of decision-makingstages, including early involvement in strategy formulation. The earlier that the HRrepresentative is involved in the decision-making process, the greater will be their impact.Early and full involvement in these decision-making processes therefore is necessary inorder to be considered actively involved in strategic decision-making processes.

HR access to these important formal and informal decision-making processes ishowever not assured (Lawler, 2011; Wright et al., 2001). Sheehan et al. (2014) explainthat HR involvement within formal and informal decision-making processes is oftencontingent on the power of meaning, either assigned to HR professionals by othermanagers or generated by the HR professional themselves. HR professionals who areable to access the power of meaning are able to make HR initiatives appear legitimate,desirable, rational and inevitable. Similarly Pritchard (2010) has argued that for HR tobecome a strategic partner, success is not contingent on the execution of certain taskswithin a new job specification but rather on the social construction, or performance of astrategic HR identity. In view of these arguments about the importance of constructedmeaning, when HR professionals are struggling to balance their roles, there is a riskthat they will not be able to construct clear meaning of their strategic partnership.If their performance is unclear they risk losing power over meaning and the likelihoodthat HR will be included in senior management decisions (Sheehan et al., 2014).

358

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

When an HR professional is time poor due to role overload pressures or isconflicted and experiences tensions between conflicting expectations theseconditions may reduce confidence in the HR professional’s strategic capacity andimpact the likelihood that HR professionals are included in formal and informaldecision-making discussions. Our first set of hypotheses are framed to capturethe impact of HR role management issues, as reflected in HR role overload and roleconflict, on the HR function’s actual involvement in the full range of stages instrategic decision making:

H1. Greater HR role overload will be associated with lower HR involvement instrategic decision making.

H2. Greater HR role conflict will be associated with lower HR involvement instrategic decision making.

Environmental dynamism as a moderatorThe concepts of environmental dynamism (at the firm level) and perceivedenvironmental uncertainty (at the individual level) have been extensively discussedover decades in organisation theory and the management literature (e.g. Jansen et al.,2009; Milliken, 1987; Thompson, 1967). Environmental dynamism refers to both therate of change and the unpredictability of change in the external environment of a firm( Jansen et al., 2009). The dynamism in a given environment may be due to factors suchas technological change, interruptions in the supply chain or fluctuations in demand fora product or service ( Jansen et al., 2006). Dubois and Dubois (2012) argue that HR canmake an enormous contribution when an organisation is considering issues associatedwith sustainability. Elsewhere Paauwe (2009) has argued for HR as an enabler for anarray of strategic options specifically in the development of a flexible workforceresponsive to a range of strategic challenges. Environmental dynamism may wellpresent the HR function with an opportunity to take a role in the design of strategies tocope with a dynamic environment (see Boyle and McDonnell, 2013; Townsend andWilkinson, 2013) but the HR professional has to be able to meet the challenge andgenerate confidence in their ability to provide necessary advice. The previous review ofHR role overload and role conflict indicates that such role management issues maydetract from the HR professional’s capacity to generate the necessary confidenceduring a period of environmental dynamism. As noted previously, role overloadcounteracts the positive effects of self-efficacy and confidence in one’s ability(Brown et al., 2005) therefore an HR professional who is overloaded may be constrainedby their own belief that they can make a strategic contribution. Role conflict also hasnegative ramifications for the HR professional’s personal impact. As Rizzo et al. (1970)have explained, role conflict is associated with conflicting expectations and results inreduced personal performance. There is evidence therefore that role management haspersonal implications. For the purposes of the current discussion however, elevatedlevels of personal self-doubt and reduced personal performance associated with roleoverload and conflict, may detract from the HR professional’s capacity to create aneffective impression and therefore access the power of meaning necessary to be part ofheightened strategic decision making during a period of increased environmentaldynamism. Alternatively when the HR professional is able to manage these rolemanagement issues, there will be greater confidence in HR’s capacity to make thetype of substantial contribution during periods of environmental dynamism that is

359

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

described by Dubois and Dubois (2012) and Paauwe (2009). The final hypothesestherefore become:

H3. Environmental dynamism will moderate the relationship between HR roleoverload and HR involvement in strategic decision making, such that therelationship between role overload and HR involvement in strategic decisionmaking will be increasingly negative at higher levels of dynamism.

H4. Environmental dynamism will moderate the relationship between HR roleconflict and HR involvement in strategic decision making, such that therelationship between role conflict and HR involvement in strategic decisionmaking will be increasingly negative at higher levels of dynamism.

The full set of relationships to be tested in the study is depicted in Figure 1.

MethodSample and procedureAustralia is an appropriate research context for the research at hand, exhibiting theenvironmental dynamism, change and unpredictability referred to by Jansen et al. (2009).Deloitte et al. (2014) report, for example, that due to Australia’s location and geographicspread, local companies regularly deal with unforeseen events and complex supplychains, caused by a combination of natural disasters and congestion in the cities andports. Australia has also been impacted by its geographic proximity to high-growthAsian economies that have created major opportunities for Australian companies.The connections with these economies however also present complex legal, economic andcultural challenges. In terms of economic growth, Australia’s productivity has slowedwith the Reserve Bank of Australia and the Australian Treasury reporting changingeconomic conditions over the last decade and a decline in Australia’s productivityperformance despite a commodity boom (Green et al., 2012). The Australian businessenvironment therefore presents companies with variable, changing business conditions.

The sample for the research comprised senior HR and top management executivesin medium to large employers in Australia. Respondents provide an experiencedoverview of the HR function and of the connections between HR and involvement indecision making. The research used a mail survey conducted in 2012 and piloted withten HR experts including executive HR practitioners associated with the Australianprofessional body for executive HR practitioners, the Australian Senior HumanResource Roundtable, as well as senior academics and HR consultants. The feedback

H4

HR role overload

HR role conflict

HR involvement in strategicdecision making

Environmental dynamism

H1

H2

H3

Figure 1.Model of theproposed impact ofenvironmentaldynamism in therelationship betweenHR role overloadand conflict andHR involvementin strategicdecision making

360

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

from the pilot-testing ensured that the survey items were clear, focused and had facevalidity (De Vellis, 2003; Podsakoff et al., 2012).

We collected data from two sources (senior HR and top management executives) tominimise the risk of common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2012). The finalised surveywas mailed to a random sample of 2000 senior HR executives who were identifiedthrough a national mailing list provider. The mailing list included HR executives inAustralian organisations across the major Australian and New Zealand StandardIndustry Classification categories. The HR executives were provided with a secondseparate questionnaire designed for a top management team (TMT) member and wereasked to forward this on to a member of the TMT who participates in the majordecision-making processes within their organisation. Prospective respondents wereassured that their responses were confidential, and were informed of the voluntarynature of participation. Both sets of questionnaires were coded to ensure that theresponses of HR executives and the TMT could be matched. A follow-up e-mail wassent two weeks after the initial mail out to encourage participation, as were telephonefollow-ups a month later. Similar processes of recruitment have been used in otherTMT research, such as a recent study by Li et al. (2013), who interviewed CEOs andasked the CEO to identify managers to be invited to participate in a survey.

A total of 180 questionnaires were received from HR executives, yielding a responserate of 9 per cent. This response rate is relatively consistent with those obtained inprevious studies with senior executives and can be attributed to the difficulties associatedwith obtaining responses from top managerial level respondents (Cycyota and Harrison,2006). For example, Hambrick et al. (1993) noted that a response rate of 10-12 per cent wastypical for surveys of top executives. Of these 180 responses, 102 could be matchedwith a member of the TMT. In total, 64 per cent of HR executives were female, whereasTMT executives were largely male (71 per cent). The mean age of the HR respondentswas 47.03 years (SD¼ 9.75) and 47.16 years (SD¼ 8.08) for TMT respondents. HRexecutives had been working for an average of 7.35 years (SD¼ 6.98) in their currentorganisations and 9.08 years (SD¼ 8.39) for TMT executives. The mean position tenurewas 4.52 years (SD¼ 3.79) for HR executives and 5.10 years (SD¼ 5.61) for TMTmembers.

The matched sample covered a wide range of inzdustries, including manufacturing,health and community services and education. The majority (76 per cent) wereprivate sector organisations. The organisations covered a wide range in terms ofnumber of employees, with 38 per cent having 500 or more employees, 23 per cent200-499 employees and 39 per cent employing fewer than 200 employees.

MeasuresHR involvement in strategic decision making. Using the scale developed by Purcell(1995), respondents were asked to rate on a five-point scale (1¼ not at all involved to5¼ highly involved), the HR function’s involvement in each of the four stages of astrategic business decision. The four stages are, drawing up proposals; evaluatingfinancial consequences; taking the final decision; and implementation. To minimiseconcerns over common method variance, TMT executives provided the ratings for thisvariable. The scores on the four items were averaged to form a composite measure(possible range of scores is 1-5), with higher scores indicating greater HR involvementin strategic decision-making processes (α¼ 0.84).

HR role overload was measured by adapting the scale used by Brown et al. (2005) toreflect the specific issue of completing both the functional expert and strategic partnerroles described by Ulrich (2009). We measured HR role overload with four items and

361

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

asked how often (on a scale from 1¼ not at all to 5¼ always) the HR executiveexperienced each of the following, “the amount of HR functional expert work I dointerferes with how well the strategic partnering work gets done”; “I do not haveenough help and resources to do both HR functional expert and strategic partner workwell”; “I do not have enough time to get both the HR functional expert and strategicpartner work done well”; and “I have to try to satisfy too many different people”.Collectively, these items are consistent with the conceptual definition of role overload asspecified by Kahn et al. (1964) and with previous research (House, 1980). The scores on thefour items were averaged to form a composite measure (possible range of scores is 1-5),with higher scores indicating greater HR role overload (α¼ 0.91).

HR role conflict was measured adapting the scale used by Yitzhak and Tiegs (1995) toreflect the issue of meeting the competing expectations of employees and employers.Yitzhak and Tiegs’ scale included three items relating specifically to meeting theconflicting expectations of different groups of people. These items were re-worded to reflectthe aspect of role conflict that is being measured in the current study, the HR role conflictexperienced when meeting the different expectations of management and employees.The items asked how often (1¼ never to 5¼ always) the HR executive experiences thefollowing, “I receive incompatible requests from management and employees”, “I do thingsthat are apt to be accepted by either employees or by management but not by both” and“I work with management and employees who operate quite differently”. A further twoitems were included that similarly reflected the conflict of meeting different expectations,“I work with management and employees who have quite different expectations of the HRrole” and “To satisfy management I have to upset employees”. The scores on the five itemswere averaged to form a composite measure (possible range of scores is 1-5), with higherscores indicating greater HR role conflict (α¼ 0.70).

Environmental dynamism was measured using a five-item scale developed andvalidated by Jansen et al. (2009). HR executives were asked to respond to each of thefollowing five items on a five-point scale (1¼ strongly disagree to 5¼ strongly agree),“Changes in our local market are intense”, “Our clients regularly ask for new products andservices”, “In our local market, changes are taking place continuously”, “In a year, nothinghas changed in our market” and “In our market, the volumes of products and servicesto be delivered change quickly and often”. The scores on the five items were averaged toform a composite measure (possible range of scores is 1-5), with higher scores indicatinggreater rate of change and the instability of the external environment (α¼ 0.83).

Control variables. We controlled for three variables that potentially may confoundthe results. First, organisational size affects the strategic role assigned to HRM. Smallto medium-sized organisations in Australia are less likely than larger organisations tohave formal HRM practices and a strategically active HR department (Kotey andSheridan, 2001; Michelson and Kramar, 2003; Nankervis et al., 2002). Accordingly, wecontrolled for organisational size, measured as the total number of employees in theorganisation in Australia on a seven-point ordinal scale from (1) 50 or less to (7) 10,000or more. Second, organisational sector affects the strategic role of HR, as private sectororganisations more often include the function in a strategic business partner role(Teo, 2002). A dummy variable was included to indicate if the organisation was privatesector (coded 1) or other sector (coded 0). Third, we controlled for gender of the HRmanager (coded 1¼ female, 0¼male). Writers such as Broadbridge and Simpson(2011) and Ross-Smith and Huppatz (2010) call for ongoing research into theexplanatory power of gender in understanding the enactment of senior managerial

362

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

roles. Reichel et al. (2010) in particular note the impact of gender in the HR professionand Simpson and Lenoir (2003) have argued that women in HR perform the roledifferently. It was considered relevant therefore that gender may influence the experienceof role overload/conflict and degree of involvement in decision making.

Method of analysisThe hypotheses were tested using OLS regression with HR involvement in strategicinvolvement as the dependent variable. Multiple regression is the method of choice foranalysing general linear models with moderator (interaction) effects (Cohen et al., 2003).As recommended by Tabachnick and Fidell (2013), to reduce problems associated withmulticollinearity and to generate correct standardised regression weights in moderatedregression, all variables, were z-standardised prior to analysis. Evaluation of regressionassumptions showed that normality, linearity, absence of multicollinearity andhomoscedasticity were satisfactory.

ResultsTable I presents the means, standard deviations and intercorrelations of the studyvariables. It is of interest to note that female HR managers were more likely thanmales to report significantly higher role conflict (r¼ 0.27, po0.05). Factor analysis wasconducted to examine the potential influence of common method bias and to establishthe construct validity of the four key measures (HR involvement in strategic decisionmaking, environmental dynamism, HR role overload and HR role conflict). We usedexploratory (principal components analysis) factor analysis with Promax (oblique)rotation as the role overload and role conflict measures were adapted and have not beensubject to previous construct validation in the HRM context. Inspection of the scree plotsupported a four-factor solution. In this four-factor solution (explaining 64 per cent ofthe variance), all items loaded onto their intended constructs with a mean factor loadingof 0.76, providing support for construct validity.

Results of the regression analyses are shown in Table II.We first examine the hypothesised effects of HR role overload and HR role overload

on HR involvement in strategic decision making. As shown in Table II (Model 1),controlling for organisational size, sector and gender of HR manager, HR role overloadwas not a statistically significant predictor of HR strategic involvement. Hence,H1 wasnot supported. Similarly, the relationship between HR role conflict and HR involvementin strategic decision-making processes was not significantly different from zero(see Model 2). Hence, H2 was not supported. It is also interesting to note that

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. HR involvement in strategicdecision making 3.58 0.89

2. HR role conflict 2.84 0.54 −0.093. HR role overload 3.30 0.95 0.01 0.53*4. Environmental dynamism 3.72 0.74 0.17 −0.05 −0.065. Private sector 0.76 0.43 −0.09 −0.06 0.02 0.066. Organisational sizea 3.32 1.42 0.15 −0.01 −0.01 0.02 −0.22*7. Gender of HR managerb 0.64 0.48 −0.16 0.27* 0.19 −0.07 0.06 −0.08Notes: aCoded on a scale from (1) 50 or less to (7) 10,000 or more employees; bCoded 1¼ female,0¼male. *p o0.05

Table I.Means, standarddeviations and

intercorrelationsof study variables

363

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

environmental dynamism did not have a statistically significant direct relationshipwith HR involvement in strategic decision making.

The absence of any main effects ignores the possibility that there are specificconditions under which the HR role variables may influence strategic involvement.We hypothesised environmental dynamism to be one such contextual influence orboundary condition. Specifically, H3 proposed that environmental dynamism willmoderate the relationship between HR role overload and HR involvement in strategicdecision making, such that the relationship between HR role overload and HRinvolvement in strategic decision making will be more negative at higher levels ofenvironmental dynamism. As shown in Table II (Model 3), the interaction betweenenvironmental dynamism and HR role overload was statistically significant. To aid ininterpretation of this interaction effect, we plotted the interaction using the conventionalvalues of one SD below the mean and one SD above the mean (Aiken and West, 1991).As shown in Figure 2, the relationship between HR role overload and HR involvement in

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

Organisational size 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.14Private sector −0.09 −0.09 −0.06 −0.07Gender of HR manager −0.19** −0.16 −0.15 −0.13HR role overload 0.07 0.06HR role conflict −0.06 −0.07Environmental dynamism 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.16HR role overload×Environmental dynamism −0.19*HR role conflict×Environmental dynamism −0.18**R2 0.09 0.09 0.12 0.11Notes: Standardised regression coefficients reported. *po0.05; **po0.10

Table II.Results of regressionanalyses predictingHR involvementin strategicdecision making

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

High Role OverloadLow Role Overload

HR

Str

ateg

ic In

volv

emen

t

Low Dynamism

High Dynamism

Figure 2.Interaction betweenHR role overloadand environmentaldynamism inpredicting HRinvolvementin strategicdecision making

364

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

strategic decision making was negative when environmental dynamism was high(one SD above the mean). Hence, H3 was supported. Interestingly, the relationshipbetween HR role overload and HR involvement in strategic decision making was slightlypositive when environmental dynamism was low (one SD below the mean).

H4 proposed that environmental dynamism will moderate the relationship betweenHR role conflict and HR involvement in strategic decision making, such that therelationship between HR role conflict and HR involvement in strategic decision makingwill be more negative at higher levels of environmental dynamism. The interactionbetween environmental dynamism and HR role conflict was statistically significant atthe 90 per cent level (see Table II, Model 4). Given the well-known difficulties indetecting interaction effects, even in relatively large samples (Aguinis, 1995), weproceeded to interpret this interaction.

As shown in Figure 3, consistent with H4 and similar to the effect observed for HRrole overload, the relationship between HR role conflict and HR involvement instrategic decision making was also negative when environmental dynamism was high(one SD above the mean) and again positive when low (one SD below the mean).

DiscussionThe aims of the current study were to first consider the direct impact of HR role overloadand HR role conflict on the HR function’s involvement in strategic decision making andsecond to examine whether conditions of environmental dynamism moderate the impactof HR role conflict and HR role overload in the relationship. Results did not support theexpected negative relationships between HR role overload and role conflict with HRinvolvement in strategic decision making. Once the moderating effect of environmentaldynamism was taken into account however, as expected, the associations between HRrole management and the HR function’s involvement in strategic decision making wasnegative at higher levels of dynamism. Of interest was the positive relationship betweenHR role overload and conflict with HR involvement in strategic decision making when

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

HR

Str

ateg

ic In

volv

emen

t

Low Dynamism

High Dynamism

High Role ConflictLow Role Conflict

Figure 3.Interaction between

HR role conflictand environmental

dynamism inpredicting HRinvolvementin strategic

decision making

365

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

environmental dynamism is low. Our expectation was that the relationship would benegative but less so than reported for higher levels of environmental dynamism. It wouldseem therefore that when environmental uncertainty is low, HR role overload androle conflict are positively associated with HR involvement in strategic decision making.The positive association may reflect the ongoing difficulties experienced by the HRmanager in balancing the strategic decision-making role with other HR roles. Once theenvironment becomes less stable, levels of HR role overload and tension become lesstolerable however and HR’s involvement in decision-making arenas diminishes.The following discussion highlights the value of the results with respect to currenttheoretical discussions, the implications for HR professionals operating in dynamicenvironments and the practical implications for HR role management.

The research contributes to the discussions about sources of HR power, specificallythe importance of power of meaning for HR professionals (Hardy, 1996; Sheehan et al.,2014). This source of power allows agents to make initiatives appear legitimate, desirable,rational and inevitable. Sheehan et al. (2014) have argued that it is an important source ofpower for HR professionals whose role is one that is often performed without authority asmany HR duties are now conducted by other managers and there is a resultantsubstitutability of the HR professional’s capabilities as all managers are now expected tobe HRM conversant. HR professionals therefore have to rely on power of meaning andthe creation of a unified perception of the value that they can add. Sheehan et al. (2014) inparticular note the importance of how well HR professionals communicated theirorganisational role and the extent to which they avoided role tensions. The current studyprovides some evidence that effective HR role management does indeed haveramifications for HR professionals, specifically with respect to the opportunity to be partof strategically important decision discussions during dynamic periods.

The results have several implications for the impact that HR role management canmake during periods of environmental dynamism. As noted previously, a number ofwriters have argued that HR can make an important contribution when an organisationis considering issues associated with sustainability in a dynamic environment (Duboisand Dubois, 2012; Paauwe, 2009). Nijssen and Paauwe (2012), for example examine thebenefits of HRM practices that form the basis of organisational agility capabilities andLengnick-Hall et al. (2011) emphasise HR’s role in developing “organisational resilience”or the ability to “bounce back” from difficult challenges and survive environmentaldynamism. As well as reviews of the value of specific HR practices that assist withdynamic environments, Zagelmeyer and Gollan (2012) argue that compared to otherbusiness functions, HR has much to offer in the management of individuals and groupswhen people are facing situations of uncertainty and change. First, the HR functionplays an important role in organisational change and re-structuring, downsizing,working time reductions, lay-offs, industrial relations negotiations and related changesin reward systems and working conditions. The second trend identified is that the HRfunction is under increasing scrutiny and pressure to demonstrate delivery of value toorganisations. There is recognition therefore of the value that the HR function can addduring periods of environmental dynamism but there is also an associated extendedexamination of what HR provides. The current research indicates that such scrutinywill mean that HR professionals who are struggling with role overload or role conflictwill not be included in key decision-making arenas at these times and therefore avaluable opportunity to impact on HRM policy and practice enactment is lost.

The research also has practical implications for HR practitioners. As noted earlier,Welchand Welch (2012) have urged that the discussion of HR roles should not only consider HR

366

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

role definition but issues associated with HR enactment and the negative impact for the HRfunction in simultaneously attending to divergent expectations. Our study has shown thatwhen HR is unable to manage role overload and role conflict, the risk is that there will be anabsence of an HR perspective at this decision-making level and the implication is, as Guestand King (2004) argue, that such non-involvement of HR in strategic planning creates avicious cycle, where resultant people management problems create further challenges forthe HR function that lead to reactive HRM responses and in turn reinforce the perceptionthat the HR function is ineffective and provides further justification for HR professionals tobe excluded from the strategic decision-making process. The current research reinforcesthis concern by identifying the ramifications for overloaded or conflicted HR professionalswho may have the potential to contribute in dynamic situations but are absent fromstrategic decision making when the opportunity presents.

Practical approaches to HR role overload are to increase the level of HR tasks that areoutsourced so that HR professionals are free to concentrate on strategic tasks (Lepak andSnell, 1998; Stroh and Treehuboff, 2003). There is also the option of investigating HRinformation technologies in the delivery of HR services (Gardner et al., 2003). Thesesuggestions do however require available resourcing as well as careful monitoring of thealternative sourcing to maintain the quality delivery of HR services (Dell, 2004; Delmotteand Sels, 2008). Outsourcing in particular does involve the risk of diluting the HRmessage if the outside provider does not communicate in a manner consistent with theHR message delivered by the HR professionals operating from within the organisation.This is especially relevant in view of the argued priority that should be given to themaintenance of HR’s power of meaning. The risk may be ameliorated when time is takento develop a strong relationship with any outsourced provider (Dell, 2004) but therelationship with the provider is one that does require careful management.

With respect to HR role conflict, HR functions may enlist the help of other resourcesto support distressed employees: line managers, unions or employee assistanceprogrammes (Brown et al., 2009). HR departments operating in larger organisations willalso have the option of allowing members of the HR team to specialise in various roles.Such an initiative would be underpinned by a unified HR view that employee-centredassistance concurrently generates organisational benefits (Brown et al., 2009).

The present study has some limitations. First, the cross-sectional nature of the studyprecludes making inferences about causality. The findings of this study would need tobe replicated with a longitudinal design before stronger inferences could be drawn inrelation to the relationships between the variables. A strength of the study is the useof two sources of data to address the issue of potential common method variance butas the HR manager was the contact point for the choice of the second TMT member,it is possible that this second executive may be biased in favour of the HR function.It was made clear to both the HR manager and the TMT member that their responseswere to be mailed directly to the researchers and information was de-identified once theresponses were matched. We realise that this does not reduce the possibility of the HRmanager choosing a favourable respondent but it may assist in enhancing honesty inresponses. The personal contact from the HR manager was also used as a strategy toenhance the likelihood that the other TMT member would return the survey. It is worthnoting that similar processes of recruitment have been used in other TMT research,such as a recent study by Li et al. (2013), who interviewed CEOs and asked the CEO toidentify managers to be invited to participate in a survey. Finally, generalisability issomewhat limited by the relatively small sample and possibility of non-response bias.Future research may seek to replicate these findings with a larger sample.

367

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

In terms of future research, while our approach of investigating environmentaldynamism as a moderator is consistent with leading contributions on this topic ( Jansenet al., 2009; Sirmon et al., 2007; Yang and Li, 2011), it might be interesting to consider thepossibility of environmental dynamism as an antecedent directly influencing HR rolevariables. For example, under conditions of high environmental dynamism, demand forHR to participate in strategic decision-making processes may be high, which in turncould lead to HR executives experiencing more role overload and conflict. Anotherpossible area for future research would be to investigate the impact of organisationalsize on HR role management. It is possible that HR professionals working in largerorganisations may be able to avoid role conflict as there is more opportunity tospecialise in particular HR roles. HR professionals who are working in smallercompanies however may experience greater role conflict and overload as they areworking across a broader range of HR tasks.

ConclusionThe current research has added to the discussion on the operation of HR professionalswithin strategic decision-making arenas in periods of environmental dynamism.Our research responds to the argument that environmental dynamism is becoming thenorm ( Jiao et al., 2013). Organisations face the challenge of meeting the demands ofturbulent and dynamic environments and HR professionals have the potential toprovide leadership and strategic value in decisions that steer organisations at thesetimes (Dubois and Dubois, 2012; Paauwe, 2009). The study contributes to the strategicHRM literature by providing a response to calls to further understand the factors thatdetermine HR’s strategic contribution (Aldrich et al., 2015; Lawler, 2011). The researchalso provides insights into the factors that may detract from HR strategic contributionduring periods of environmental dynamism despite the proposal that the HR functioncan add value during these periods (Dubois and Dubois, 2012; Nijssen and Paauwe,2012; Zagelmeyer and Gollan, 2012). Our research has shown that even though therehas been evolution in the HR role that now accommodates a strategic focus, when theHR professional is unable to manage additional strategic role requirements alongsidetraditional administrative expectations, or when that professional is experiencingrole conflict in balancing strategic management and employee expectations, theopportunity to make an effective contribution during dynamic periods is diminished.There has been a substantial commentary on the range of roles that the HR professionalshould now be developing (Storey, 1992; Ulrich, 1997, 2009; Ulrich et al., 2009; Ulrich andBrockbank, 2005). Perhaps, as Caldwell (2003) and Welch and Welch (2012) argue, theresearch should now turn to considering how these roles are enacted and act in a stateof balance such that the HR professional can maintain the credibility required to bea strategic decision maker in times of change.

References

Aguinis, H. (1995), “Statistical power problems with moderated multiple regression in managementresearch”, Journal of Management, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 1141-1158.

Aiken, L.S. and West, S.G. (1991), Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions,Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.

Aldrich, P., Dietz, G., Clark, T. and Hamilton, P. (2015), “Establishing HR professionals’ influenceand credibility: lessons from the capital markets and investment banking sector”, HumanResource Management, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 105-130.

368

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

Beer, M. (1997), “The transformation of the human resource function: resolving the tension betweena traditional administrative and a new strategic role”,Human Resource Management, Vol. 36No. 1, pp. 49-56.

Boyle, B. and McDonnell, M. (2013), “Exploring the impact of institutional and organisationalfactors on the reaction of MNCs to the global financial crisis”, Asia Pacific Business Review,Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 247-265.

Broadbridge, R. and Simpson, R. (2011), “25 years on: reflecting on the past and looking to thefuture in gender and management research”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 22 No. 3,pp. 470-483.

Brown, M., Metz, I., Cregan, C. and Kulik, C. (2009), “Irreconcilable differences? Strategic humanresource management and employee well-being”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources,Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 270-294.

Brown, S.P., Jones, E. and Leigh, T. (2005), “The attenuating effect of role overload onrelationships linking self-efficacy and goal level to work performance”, Journal of AppliedPsychology, Vol. 90 No. 5, pp. 972-979.

Buyens, D. and De Vos, A. (2001), “Perceptions of the value of the HR function”, Human ResourceManagement Journal, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 70-89.

Caldwell, R. (2003), “The changing roles of personnel managers, old ambiguities, new uncertainties”,Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 983-1004.

Caldwell, R. (2008), “HR business partner competency models: re-contextualising effectiveness”,Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 275-294.

Caldwell, R. (2011), “HR directors in UK boardrooms: a search for strategic influence or symboliccapital?”, Employee Relations, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 40-63.

Cohen, D. (2011), “Celebrating 50 years, the more things change the more they remain the same”,Human Resource Management, Vol. 50 No. 5, pp. 571-574.

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G. and Aiken, L.S. (2003), Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Hillsdale, NJ.

Cycyota, C.S. and Harrison, D.A. (2006), “What (not) to expect when surveying executives: a meta-analysis of top manager response rates and techniques over time”,Organizational ResearchMethods, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 133-160.

Dell, D. (2004), “HR outsourcing survey – benefits, challenges and trends”, The Conference BoardResearch Report No. R 1347 04 RR, The Conference Board Inc., New York, NY.

Delmotte, J. and Sels, L. (2008), “HR outsourcing: threat or opportunity?”, Personnel Review,Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 543-563.

Deloitte, Touche and Tohmatsu (2014), “Australian business trends 2014”, available at: www2.deloitte.com/view/en_AU/au/services/consulting/strategy-operations/australian-business-trends-2014/index.html (accessed 3 November 2014).

De Vellis, R.F. (2003), Scale Development, Theory and Application, 2nd ed., Sage Publications,Thousand Oaks, CA.

Dubois, C. and Dubois, D. (2012), “Strategic HRM as social design for environmentalsustainability in organization”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 799-826.

Floyd, S.W. and Lane, P.J. (2000), “Strategizing throughout the organization: managing roleconflict in strategic renewal”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 154-177.

Gardner, S.D., Lepak, D.P. and Bartol, K.M. (2003), “Virtual HR: the impact of informationtechnology on the human resource professional”, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 63No. 2, pp. 159-179.

369

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

Green, R., Toner, P.R. and Agarwell, R. (2012), Understanding Productivity: Australia’s Choice,The McKell Institute, University of Technology, Sydney.

Guest, D. and Bos-Nehles, A. (2013), “HRM and performance: the role of effectiveimplementation”, in Paauwe, J., Guest, D. and Wright, P. (Eds), HRM and Performance:Achievements and Challenges, Wiley, Chichester, pp. 79-96.

Guest, D. and King, Z. (2004), “Power, innovation and problem solving, the personnel managersthree steps to heaven”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 401-423.

Gunnigle, P., Lavelle, J. and Monaghan, S. (2013), “Weathering the storm? Multinationalcompanies and human resource management through the global financial crisis”,International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 214-231.

Hambrick, D.C., Geletkanycz, M.A. and Fredrickson, J.W. (1993), “Top executive commitment tothe status quo: some tests of its determinants”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 14No. 6, pp. 401-418.

Hardy, C. (1996), “Understanding power: bringing about strategic change”, British Journal ofManagement, Vol. 7 No. S1, pp. 3-16.

House, J.S. (1980), Occupational Stress and the Mental and Physical Health of Factory Workers,University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Center, Ann Arbor, MI.

Jansen, J.P., Van den Bosch, F.A.J. and Volberda, H.W. (2006), “Exploratory innovation,exploitative innovation, and performance: effects of organizational antecedents andenvironmental moderators”, Management Science, Vol. 52 No. 11, pp. 1661-1674.

Jansen, J.P., Vera, D. and Crossan, M. (2009), “Strategic leadership for exploration andexploitation: the moderating role of environmental dynamism”, Leadership Quarterly,Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 5-18.

Jiao, H., Alon, I., Koo, C.K. and Cui, Y. (2013), “When should organizational change beimplemented? The moderating effect of environmental dynamism between dynamiccapabilities and new venture performance”, Journal of Engineering and TechnologyManagement, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 188-205.

Kahn, R.L., Wolfe, D., Quinn, R. and Snoek, J.D. (1964), Organizational Stress, Studies in RoleConflict and Ambiguity, Wiley, New York, NY.

Kamoche, K. (1994), “A critique and a proposed reformulation of strategic human resourcemanagement”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 29-47.

Kelly, J. and Gennard, J. (2001), Power and Influence in the Boardroom: The Role of the Personnel/HR Director, Routledge, London.

Kelly, J. and Gennard, J. (2007), “Business strategic decision making, the role and influence ofdirectors”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 99-117.

Kochan, T. (2007), “Social legitimacy of the HRM profession, A US perspective”, in Boxall, P. andPurcell, J. (Eds),The Oxford Handbook of HRM, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 599-619.

Kochan, T.A. (2004), “Restoring trust in the human resource management profession”, AsiaPacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 132-146.

Kotey, B. and Sheridan, A. (2001), “Gender and the practice of HRM in small business”, AsiaPacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 23-40.

Kramar, R. (2012), “Trends in Australian human resource management: what next?”, Asia PacificJournal of Human Resources, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 133-150.

Lawler, E.A. (2011), “Celebrating 50 years, HR: time for a reset”, Human Resource Management,Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 171-173.

Legge, K. (1989), “Human resource management: a critical analysis”, in Storey, J. (Ed.),New Perspectives on Human Resource Management, Routledge, London, pp. 19-40.

370

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

Lemmergaard, J. (2009), “From administrative expert to strategic partner”, Employee Relations,Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 182-196.

Lengnick-Hall, C.A., Beck, T.E. and Lengnick-Hall, M.E. (2011), “Developing a capacity fororganizational resilience through strategic human resource management”, HumanResource Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 243-255.

Lepak, D.P. and Snell, S.A. (1998), “Virtual HR: strategic human resource management in the 21stcentury”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 215-234.

Li, Q., Maggitti, P.G., Smith, K.G., Tesluk, P.E. and Katila, R. (2013), “Top management attentionto innovation: the role of search selection and intensity in new product introductions”,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 893-916.

Michelson, G. and Kramar, R. (2003), “The state of HRM in Australia, progress and prospects”,Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 133-148.

Millikin, F.J. (1987), “Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: state, effectand response uncertainty”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 133-143.

Nankervis, A., Compton, R. and Savery, L. (2002), “Strategic HRM in small and mediumenterprises: a CEOs perspective?”, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 40 No. 2,pp. 260-273.

Nijssen, M. and Paauwe, J. (2012), “HRM in turbulent times, how to achieve organizationalagility?”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 23 No. 16,pp. 3315-3335.

Paauwe, J. (2009), “HRM and performance: achievements, methodological issues and prospects”,Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 127-140.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2012), “Sources of method bias in socialscience research and recommendations on how to control it”, Annual Review of Psychology,Vol. 63, pp. 539-569.

Pritchard, K. (2010), “Becoming an HR strategic partner: tales of transition”, Human ResourceManagement, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 175-188.

Purcell, J. (1995), “Corporate strategy and its link with human resource management strategy”,in Storey, J. (Ed.), Human Resource Management, A Critical Text, Routledge, London,pp. 63-86.

Reichel, A., Brandl, J. and Mayrhofer, W. (2010), “The strongest link: legitimacy of topmanagement diversity, sex stereotypes and the rise of women in human resourcemanagement”, Management Revue, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 332-352.

Rizzo, J.R., House, R.J. and Lirtzman, S.I. (1970), “Role conflict and ambiguity in complexorganizations”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 150-163.

Ross-Smith, A. and Huppatz, K. (2010), “Management, women and gender capital”, Gender, Workand Organization, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 547-566.

Sheehan, C., De Cieri, H., Cooper, B. and Brooks, R. (2014), “Exploring the power dimensions ofthe human resource function”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 2,pp. 193-210.

Simpson, P. and Lenoir, D. (2003), “Win some, lose some: women’s status in the field of humanresources in the 1990s”, Women in Management Review, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 191-198.

Sirmon, D., Hitt, M. and Ireland, R. (2007), “Managing firm resources in dynamic environments tocreate value: looking inside the black box”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 1,pp. 273-292.

Storey, J. (1992), Developments in the Management of Human Resources, Blackwell Publishing,Oxford.

371

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

Stroh, L.K. and Treehuboff, D. (2003), “Outsourcing HR functions: when – and when not – to gooutside”, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 19-28.

Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2013), Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th ed., Pearson, Sydney.

Teo, S.T.T. (2002), “Effectiveness of a corporate HR department in an Australian public sectorentity during commercialization and corporatization”, The International Journal of HumanResource Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 89-105.

Thompson, J.D. (1967), Organization in Action, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Townsend, K. and Wilkinson, A. (2013), “Contingent management plans awaiting a contingency:the GFC and workplace change in the Australian hotels sector”, Asia Pacific BusinessReview, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 266-278.

Truss, C., Gratton, L., Hope-Hailey, V., Stiles, P. and Zaleska, J. (2002), “Paying the piper: choiceand constraint in changing HR functional roles”, Human Resource Management Journal,Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 39-63.

Ulrich, D. (1997), HR Champions, Harvard Business School, Boston, MA.

Ulrich, D. (2009), HR Transformation, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.

Ulrich, D. (2011), “Celebrating 50 years: an anniversary reflection”, Human Resource Management,Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 3-7.

Ulrich, D. and Brockbank, W. (2005), The HR Value Proposition, Harvard Business School Press,Boston, MA.

Ulrich, D., Allen, J., Brockbank, W., Younger, J. and Nyman, M. (2009), HR Transformation,Building Human Resources from the Outside In, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.

Van Buren, H., Greenwood, M. and Sheehan, C. (2011), “Strategic human resource managementand the decline of employee focus”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 3,pp. 209-219.

Welch, C.L. and Welch, D.E. (2012), “What do HR managers really do? HR roles on internationalprojects”, Management International Review, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 597-614.

Wright, P., McMahan, G., Snell, S.A. and Gerhart, B. (2001), “Comparing line and HR executives’perceptions of HR effectiveness, services, roles, and contributions”, Human ResourceManagement, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 111-123.

Yang, T. and Li, C. (2011), “Competence exploration and exploitation in new productdevelopment: the moderating effects of environmental dynamism and competitiveness”,Management Decision, Vol. 49 No. 9, pp. 1444-1470.

Yitzhak, J.F. and Tiegs, R.B. (1995), “Supervisors’ role conflict and role ambiguity differentialrelations with performance ratings of subordinates and the moderating effect of screeningability”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 80 No. 2, pp. 282-291.

Zagelmeyer, S. and Gollan, P.J. (2012), “Exploring terra incognita: preliminary reflections on theimpact of the global financial crisis upon human resource management”, The InternationalJournal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 23 No. 16, pp. 3287-3294.

Zatzick, C.D. and Iverson, R.D. (2006), “High involvement management and workforce reduction:competitive advantage or disadvantage?”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 49 No. 5,pp. 999-1015.

About the authorsCathy Sheehan (PhD) is an Associate Professor in the Department of Management at theMonash University. Her publications have appeared in a wide range of leading internationalpeer-reviewed journals. Her research interests include the examination of the HR role in theHR and organisational performance relationship, employee well-being and employee retention.

372

PR45,2

www.manaraa.com

Associate Professor Cathy Sheehan is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:cathy.sheehan@monash.edu

Helen De Cieri (PhD) is a Professor in the Department of Management at the Monash University.Helen has published widely on a range of HRM research topics. Her current research interestsare focused on relationships between environmental volatility, HRM, employee well-being andorganisational performance.

Brian Cooper (PhD) is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Management at the MonashUniversity. He has published extensively in the area of human resource management andleadership. Cooper lecturers in quantitative research methods. His research interests include therelationships between human resource management practices, leadership and employee workattitudes and behaviours.

Tracey Shea (PhD) is a Research Fellow in the Department of Management at the MonashUniversity. Her publications have appeared in a range of peer reviewed journals. Her currentresearch includes scale evaluation studies and large survey research projects in the areas ofoccupational health and safety, employee well-being and organisational performance.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htmOr contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

373

Strategicimplicationsof HR role

management

www.manaraa.com

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited withoutpermission.